Tax funds cover Dynegy’s travel, meals

Port approved the expenses as part of demolition cost for South Bay plant

According to a presentation at the City Council on Nov. 1, the funds are to be used for decommissioning, dismantling and removal of the plant; returning the facility and site free and clear of all structures, improvements and fixtures; any investigation, assessment, monitoring, clean up, containment, remediation, mitigation, removal and disposal of hazardous materials; and preparation of any plans and obtaining permits.

Port staff maintains the travel billings are covered by those categories. Chula Vista’s port commission representative, Ann Moore, said she thought the funds were being spent on asbestos abatement.

“The property Escrow Agreement allows for expenses related to remediation measures,” Elicone said in a statement. “If the Port District reasonably determines in good faith that the use of escrow funds is not for permitted uses ... then the Port District may object to the withdrawal of funds from the escrow account.”

Dynegy’s holding company filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday. Company officials said the South Bay unit is not affected and the company plans to follow through with demolition. Dynegy has been submitting receipts and travel expense summaries for years, escalating this past spring.

Travel expenses in March were $18,073 and charges in May totaled $14,137. The average business meal charge was about $30, while the average lodging was $325.

Peace acknowledged that the legislation allowing for the escrow account did not specifically prohibit travel for the company’s executives.

“Never in a zillion years would it have even occurred to me to worry about writing: ‘and don’t pay people’s travel expenses,’” Peace said. “It never occurred to me that anyone would have the chutzpah to suggest the travel expenses of an employee of a major power provider should be paid from public funds. I’m just shocked.”

Port officials are disputing around $28,000 of employee expenses billed under travel, but not based on whether the charges are appropriate. The port is asking for further documentation of those expenses before paying, according to correspondence obtained by The Watchdog.

Moore said approval for the travel reimbursements never came up for a public vote at the port commission, nor were commissioners made aware of the nature of the billings in closed sessions.

In addition to travel, other charges include billings for cell phones, legal services, asbestos consulting, grading, security at the site and consultation services for environmental compliance.

Of the total $3.4 million billed by Dynegy, the Port has contested $1.5 million. Some of the objections are based on documentation. Other disputed amounts, for some legal services, include items that the port says are outside the scope of allowable charges.

On one $1,123 cellphone bill, the port declined to pay. “No current charges due,” says a note on the bill, which included past-due charges with no itemization.

Councilman Rudy Ramirez is calling on the Port to have a public vote before future charges are approved.

“There needs to be a full transparency and timely accountability,” Ramirez said. “We need to know how this money is being spent and how it is being disbursed on a real time basis — whatever the port needs to do to make that happen.”

Promotional image from Roberto Dephillippi’s restaurant, a Chula Vista establishment that advertises “the best prime rib in America,” with “leggy waitresses” in a “cavern of gilt and red leather.”